Rocky Burt wrote:
> 1) Ease of development - AT helps cut down on boilerplate code
> as compared to building a regular CMF type (without AT)
>
> 2) Schema - The ability to declare which fields a content type has
> and what "types" those fields are
>
> 3) Widgets - The ability to declare general purpose distributable
> widgets that get displayed by default for either viewing a field
> directly or viewed the editable version of a field
>
> 4) References - Being able to have a common framework that allows us
> to relate one AT-based content type instance to another

Advertising

I forgot a very important fifth component:
5) Storage layers - AT provides a standard way of having the storage
of fields exist somewhere other than directly on the content type itself
such as in a sql database.
My opinion on #5 is:
I think sqlos has a good approach to accomplishing another storage
layer on standard z3 content types. At a minimum the AT storage layer
mechanism should be broken out... possibly using the same sort of
strategy as sqlos (although I think I'd still like to see something a
little more transparent that does all field<->implementation mappings
externally in zcml or something similiar)
- Rocky
--
Rocky Burt
ServerZen Software -- http://www.serverzen.com
ServerZen Hosting -- http://www.serverzenhosting.net
News About The Server -- http://www.serverzen.net
_______________________________________________
Zope-CMF maillist - Zope-CMF@lists.zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests